The Causes of the American Civil War

The civil war happened between 1861 and 1865. After Abraham Lincoln rose to power in 1860, tensions erupted into a civil war between the pro-slavery southern states and anti-slavery northern states (Howard 2). Eleven southern states withdrew from the union which divided the United States into two – however, Abraham Lincoln asserted that the breakaway was illegal. He went ahead and requested the Congress for about 500, 000 combatants to avert the possibly violent rebellion (Howard 3). In April 1861, the civil war started and continued for four consecutive years. Millions of people were maimed and over 600, 000 paramilitary troops killed. The southern states were defeated while the Northern states ended up winning the war. However, the war could have been prevented in different ways. For example, meeting the elected officials would have opened a way for reuniting the southern and northern states. (Howard 5) Additionally, Abraham Lincoln was the one who instigated the civil war – replacing him would have ended it. This essay explains the different ways in which the civil war could have been prevented.

Legalization of Slaves Would Have Continued

One of the primary causes that activated the American Civil War was the heated debate regarding slavery and the whole scenario could have been prevented if the slavery remained lawful. It is worth noting that the southern states were pro-slavery while the Northern States were anti-slavery (Beck n.p.). The slave states should have remained in the union and continue as before – this was of course not the case. Gradual liberation coupled with recompense to the previous slave owners may have been agreed to ensure that the union is freed from slavery (Beck n.p.). The most critical question one would ask himself is for how long would the Confederate States have sustained their ‘unique association’ of slavery against contemporary history trends. The solution would have been to come up with some sort of steady emancipation ultimately instead of being pressurized to unshackle the slave's absent compensation (Beck n.p.) Surely, the lives of all the slaves within the union would have been much better without a war. Additionally, the whites within the separated states would have been safe and more prosperous compared to utterances they made after suffering in the war as well as during ‘reconstruction’ – the military occupation (Beck n.p.).

Some people might claim that the slaves in the disaffiliated states could have been worse. Nonetheless, it is crystal clear that they greatly suffered during the civil war. The slaves in the southern states who were liberated by the North were given twelve months to be able to restructure their lives. Within this period the slaves were favored with the outstanding political chances – the union occupation had already marginalized the rebels. However, the anger of the whites in the south to having this forced on them resulted in a stronger reaction after the end of reconstruction in 1877. To make the matter worse the white created ridiculous segregation system of the Jim Crow statutes which propagated hatred amid all races for the subsequent centuries. The abolitionist in the North could have invented ways to help the slaves in the south to prevent the break out of the civil war and most important - the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law could not have happened.

Replacement of President Abraham Lincoln

Another major cause of the civil war was the election of President Abraham Lincoln. Research indicates that Lincoln did not have the support of the southern states and that he only favored the Northern States (Egerton 18). As such, the resolution to this problem would have been to replace Lincoln with a person who did not care about the Confederate or Union States. Additionally, Lincoln would have been impeached. If he had allowed the lower southern states to depart in peace, the states in the upper south may not have broken away (Egerton 19). Nevertheless, Abraham Lincoln used force to maintain unity – yet Tennessee, North Carolina, Arkansan as well as Virginia could have remained within the Union. Moreover, Congress would have sufficient votes to prohibit slavery now that the lower southern states had already withdrawn from the union.

Right from the moment, Lincoln became the president he opposed the idea of allowing the states in the south withdraw peacefully. He decided to take the position that breakaway was not legal and that utilizing force against the Federal Government was treason and rebellion against the U.S. government (Egerton 23). He failed to acknowledge the Confederate States as legitimate entities. He also prohibited anyone in his government to negotiate with their delegates. To make it worse, he rejected a mediation offer from the Napoleon III who was the France President at the time (Egerton 24). In March 1861, peace commissioners were dispatched to Washington by Jefferson Davis with an offer to pay every Federal Asset in the South as well as take the southern part of the national debt. Nonetheless, Abraham Lincoln failed even to recognize them hence blocking every effort to solve the conflict via peaceful means (Egerton 25). He decided to take a hard line that the states in the south had to reunite whether they liked it or not. Unless Lincoln relinquished the tariffs and forts, or unless there was a reunion, it was crystal clear that a war would break out – and it did. Therefore, impeaching Abraham Lincoln would have been the best way to prevent the civil war.

Meeting of the Elected Officials

Instead of turning to violence, a meeting could have been set with the elected officials to come up with a plan for a reunion. The meeting would have been very critical because they would have discussed whether to ban slavery or not and sanction laws that suited everybody regarded as a citizen (Hill n.p.). Meetings such as this usually end peacefully, with all the participants in agreement. If Abraham Lincoln had come to an agreement and negotiated the Federal installations settlement within the seceded states as well as their part of the national debt and also give up the unequal taxes, there is no doubt that the cost of the war could have been saved (Hill n.p.).  Even though the remaining states in the North might have lost some assets they had exploited the southern states via tariffs – this would have been as very small costs compared to the aftermath of the civil war (Hill n.p.).  One of the most significant benefits of a peaceful solution to the problem between the southern and northern states would have been averting the death of 625, 000 people and also preventing more from being injured. It is difficult to imagine the psychological distress that was inflicted by young men who were forced to fight and kill their fellow countrymen, children, and women.

Unity Between America and Britain

According to Watkins, the unity between Britain and America would have saved the war because he argues that the south could not have opposed the North and Britain altogether (Watkins n.p.). Additionally, the war would not have happened if the south and the north had become independent on their own: both Britain and the North would have forced the south on slavery externally. The war could have occurred only if the U.S. was an established parity between the south and the north – with the southern states presuming that they required to maintain this parity (Watkins n.p.). It is worth noting that even with this, there was stability in the situation till specific coincidences happened between 1844 and 1846 in the division and acquisition of the western territory – Texas, Oregon, New Mexico, and California.

 Formerly, under the Missouri Compromise, Oklahoma was the only probable additional slave state on the United States territory whereas several free states could have been established to the north of 36°30′ - however, this did not alarm the south whatsoever (Watkins n.p.). This only changed the moment Polk was closely elected as the president on the promise of expanding the southwest and northwest, capturing Texas and declaring war against Mexico on an insubstantial basis. The Democrats in the Northern state were agitated which propelled Wilmot Proviso to prohibit any slavery in the southwestern territories enraging the south who believed this was an existential threat and an insult (Watkins n.p.). In an attempt to avert the Proviso, President Taylor tried to declare all the Mexican territories which had been conquered as free states which worsened the situation. After 4 years of threatened disunion and struggle – only Compromise of 1850 was created leaving the south feeling that it was cheated other than a robust Act regarding slavery. The Northern and the Southern states were, therefore, left defensive, angry and also primed for future conflict (Watkins n.p.). Therefore, this future conflict was significant in instigating the civil war and could have been resolved with better statesmanship.

Conclusion

From the above discussion, it is evident that the aftermath of the civil war could have been prevented. Even though many people argue that the war was inevitable, there is sufficient evidence which proves this wrong. For instance, if the legalization of slaves continued, the war would not have happened. Further, Abraham Lincoln played a major part in activating this war and his replacement would have averted the war. It is also unfortunate that no peaceful meeting happened between the elected officials to prevent the war, yet it was a good solution.

Work Cited

Beck Sanderson. "How Lincoln Could Have Prevented Civil War by Sanderson Beck."Literary Works of Sanderson Beck, www.san.beck.org/LincolnCivilWar.html.

Boyle Joseph. "Could the U.S. Have Avoided the Civil War?"Slate Magazine, slate.com/human-interest/2016/07/could-the-us-have-avoided-the-civil-war.html.

Egerton, Douglas R. Year of Meteors: Stephen Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, and the Election That Brought on the Civil War. Bloomsbury Publishing USA, 2010.

Hill Samuel. "Could the Civil War Have Been Prevented? – Religion Online."Religion Online, www.religion-online.org/article/could-the-civil-war-have-been-prevented/.

Howard, Sara Catherine. "The Civil War."Teacher Librarian43.5 (2016): 10.

Watkins Williams "Could the Civil War Have Been Avoided?"The Beacon, 1 May 2017, blog.independent.org/2017/05/01/could-the-civil-war-have-been-avoided/.